Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 49

Thread: Give Rand Paul a round of applause

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177

    Give Rand Paul a round of applause



    For his filibuster effort. I do not agree with him entirely on the issue but I like that he is bringing an important issue to light and holding gov't accountable. This is less about filibustering the nomination of Brennan and more about using this opportunity to get Obama and his henchmen to put their names on something.

    When can the gov't kill an American citizen on American soil?

    Watch Live
    http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

    P.S. It has been a bipartisan effort with Senators from both parties including Ron Wyden (D) Oregon.
    Last edited by DDNYjets; 03-06-2013 at 07:02 PM.

  2. #2
    So what is new, when was the last time we heard the actual truth from anyone with the Obama Administration.

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Jersey shore
    Posts
    2,067
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Hear, hear

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Parsippany, NJ
    Posts
    3,676
    Nice to see a real filibuster, not the BS that's been happening for the last few years.

  5. #5
    It's a little scary that our government refuses to categorically say that they will not assassinate American citizens on American soil without a trial.

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,541
    Quote Originally Posted by JetsCrazey View Post
    It's a little scary that our government refuses to categorically say that they will not assassinate American citizens on American soil without a trial.
    Scarier that the media is again ignoring something that Obuttocks is doing that had Bush tried it, would have resulted in calls for impeachment and treason.

    So who really has shredded the Constitution?

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,948
    Quote Originally Posted by JetsCrazey View Post
    It's a little scary that our government refuses to categorically say that they will not assassinate American citizens on American soil without a trial.
    Unfortunately, it's the direction that American society is heading. As technology continues to improve over the coming decades, it's only going to get worse.

    The Patriot Act should be renamed the Traitor Act. It opened the door to our coming police state, driven by fear, all in the name of security.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    Scarier that the media is again ignoring something that Obuttocks is doing that had Bush tried it, would have resulted in calls for impeachment and treason.

    So who really has shredded the Constitution?
    Congress should repeal the authority they gave to the President during wartime, no?

  9. #9
    We are talking about murdering citizens that have been charged or convicted by anyone. Brennan is another POS!

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    5,008
    I hate the idea of drones, but then I hate MNF on ESPN and self check out.

    Times are changing, and drones are part of that change.

    Is there some new law being proposed?

    The government is a ****ed up mess, Ruby Ridge and Waco were tragedies. Still I don't fault the cops that shoot a hostage taker or a crazed man shooting people without due process.

    If the president knows some great tragedy is about to occur and he has it in his power to stop it, he should. This is the way it has been for quite some time.

    Extreme circumstances call for extreme measures.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnails View Post
    I hate the idea of drones, but then I hate MNF on ESPN and self check out.

    Times are changing, and drones are part of that change.

    Is there some new law being proposed?

    The government is a ****ed up mess, Ruby Ridge and Waco were tragedies. Still I don't fault the cops that shoot a hostage taker or a crazed man shooting people without due process.

    If the president knows some great tragedy is about to occur and he has it in his power to stop it, he should. This is the way it has been for quite some time.

    Extreme circumstances call for extreme measures.
    That is not what they are arguing. The examples you gave possess an imminent danger to society.

    The point that Paul is trying to make is that it is wrong to kill an American citizen on American soil that may not pose as an immediate threat. Also drones cause a lot of collateral damage and innocents will likely be killed as well.

  12. #12
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,572
    Big props to Rand Paul. I was hoping he'd break Strom Thurmond's record of a 24 hour filibuster. And it was certainly an important topic to filibuster on - one that should unite Republicans and Democrats.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    That is not what they are arguing. The examples you gave possess an imminent danger to society.

    The point that Paul is trying to make is that it is wrong to kill an American citizen on American soil that may not pose as an immediate threat. Also drones cause a lot of collateral damage and innocents will likely be killed as well.
    That contradicts what Holder wrote in his response to Paul.

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    That contradicts what Holder wrote in his response to Paul.
    What do you mean?

    From what I understand Paul was not satisfied with Holder's response. Mainly bc it lacked a declaration that they would not use drones to kill American citizens.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    What do you mean?

    From what I understand Paul was not satisfied with Holder's response. Mainly bc it lacked a declaration that they would not use drones to kill American citizens.
    The Obama administration, Holder said, rejected the use of military force where "well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat." But in theory, it'd be legal for the president to order such an attack under certain circumstances, Holder said.

    "The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder wrote.

  16. #16

    Give Republican Lindsey Graham A Round of Applause for honesty

    “To my Republican colleagues, I don’t remember any of you coming down here suggesting that President Bush was going to kill anybody with a drone, do you?” Graham said. “They had a drone program back then, all of a sudden this drone program has gotten every Republican so spun up. What are we up to here?”




    Mr. Lindsey Graham what your party is "up to" is being phony and disingenuous. Here is but one example among thousands;

    We are against wasteful spending...until we are back in power or to put it another way; we were against wasteful spending from 1976-1980, then forgot about the topic from 1981-1992 then remembered it from 1992-2000 and er, um...forgot about it again from 2001-2008. But now we remembered it again!!!

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2MsjwyHHD
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 03-07-2013 at 02:16 PM.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    “To my Republican colleagues, I don’t remember any of you coming down here suggesting that President Bush was going to kill anybody with a drone, do you?” Graham said. “They had a drone program back then, all of a sudden this drone program has gotten every Republican so spun up. What are we up to here?”





    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2MsjwyHHD
    The day after he has dinner with Barry. Wonder if this was discussed.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    The Obama administration, Holder said, rejected the use of military force where "well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat." But in theory, it'd be legal for the president to order such an attack under certain circumstances, Holder said.

    "The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder wrote.
    He basically danced around it. It is a yes or no question.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    He basically danced around it. It is a yes or no question.
    No, whether you agree or disagree, he answered the question.

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,177
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    No, whether you agree or disagree, he answered the question.
    No he didn't. He basically used the hypothetical as an excuse. He answered it like a lawyer.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us